Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71409 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10466 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajaram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed today on behalf of the State is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Prashant Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Patel, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Dhirendra Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 13 of 1999, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, present matter is of the year 1999 and applicant is in jail since 20.08.2024 but he was not an absconder. He further submits, actually in the year 1996 i.e. well before of the lodgement of the FIR of the present case he left his village along with his family members and started living in Punjab and this fact is even evident from Annexure-7 to the affidavit. He further submits, when applicant came to know that he is warranted in the present case then he surrendered before the court concerned. 5. He further submits, as far as merit of the present case is concerned, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and except the evidence of last seen there is no other evidence against the applicant and even evidence of last seen could only be surfaced after more than two months. 6. He further submits, applicant is 82 years old and infirm person and he is not having any criminal history. 7. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted, applicant absconded for about 25 years and there is every possibility that if he will be released on bail then he will again abscond but they could not dispute the fact that applicant is about 82 years old and infirm person and it is a case of circumstantial evidence and except the evidence of last seen there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. They further could not dispute the fact that even evidence of last seen could be surfaced after two months. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, it reflects, applicant appeared before the court concerned after 25 years, therefore, prima facie he appears to be an absconder but applicant is 82 years old and infirm person and in the instant bail application he has given an undertaking that if he will be released on bail then he will regularly attend the trial court and will fully cooperate with the trial. 10. Further, as far as merit of the present case is concerned, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and except the evidence of last seen there is no other evidence against him and even evidence of last seen could be surfaced after two months. 11. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 20.08.2024. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 14. Let the applicant - Rajaram be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 15. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 16. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 5.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad